Alex Salmond’s preferred question for the Scottish independence referendum
ballot paper was today rejected as “biased” by the watchdog that will
oversee the vote.

The Electoral Commission concluded the First Minister’s plan to ask Scots if they “agree” Scotland should be an independent country was slanted as it encouraged people to vote yes.

After weeks of testing alternatives, the watchdog recommended it be replaced with the “more neutral” question: “Should Scotland be an independent country? Yes / No.”

The final decision lies with the SNP-dominated Scottish Parliament and all sides today agreed to accept the wording, following warnings to Mr Salmond he faced a public backlash if he refused.

Although it makes no express reference to leaving the United Kingdom, Unionists are confident Scots will be aware of this by the time of the 2014 vote.

The commission suggested a compromise over campaign funding that will give both sides equal spending power, but also recommended UK and Scottish ministers set out what will happen after the referendum in a joint statement.

This would mean both governments setting out the process for dividing up the UK’s assets in the event of a ‘yes’ vote or examining the devolution of further powers if Scots reject outright separation.

John McCormick, Electoral Commissioner for Scotland said: “Any referendum question must be, and be seen to be, neutral. People told us that they felt the words 'Do you agree' could lead voters towards voting 'yes'.

“People had a clear understanding that 'independent country' meant being separate from the UK. But they did want factual information in advance about what will happen after the referendum.

“We're asking the UK and Scottish Government to provide that clarity and we'll then make sure it gets to voters as part of our public awareness campaign.”

Nicola Sturgeon, the Deputy First Minister, confirmed the Scottish government was accepting all the commission’s recommendations.

She said: “While its view is that our proposed question was clear, simple and easy to understand, I am nevertheless happy to accept their recommended change.”

Welcoming the commission’s proposal for both sides set out the process to be followed after the vote, she added: ““I have been calling for the UK Government to enter discussions to allow the voters to be better informed, but so far they have refused.”

Michael Moore, the Scottish Secretary, said: “We accept the Commission's advice on the clarity of the question, the funding levels for the referendum and on the clarity of the process.”

He said the Government will publish next month an analysis paper that further examines the process for separation, after which he would be happy to discuss the document with the SNP.

Alistair Darling, leader of the pro-UK Better Together campaign, said he was pleased the commission rejected Mr Salmond’s “fixed” question and spending limits that would have given the separatists an unfair advantage.

“It looks like we have won that argument. Alex Salmond has had to concede that he cannot be both the referee and player in this particular game,” he said.

An agreement signed by David Cameron and Mr Salmond last year gives the Scottish Parliament control over the referendum’s wording, timing and franchise and campaign funding.

However, the Prime Minister insisted on the Electoral Commission overseeing the ballot rather than a new body that Mr Salmond wanted to set up specially.

The commission asked Ipsos MORI to conduct research into what voters, including 16 and 17-year-olds, whom the SNP want to include in the franchise, thought of the wording.

Although people said Mr Salmond’s question was simple and intelligible, it was “commonly felt by research participants to be biased towards a ‘yes’ outcome and potentially leading people towards a ‘yes’ vote.”

They told Ipsos MORI the wording implied Scotland being independent was a “good thing” rather than “allowing voters to form and express their own view.”

It also suggested “that the decision has in fact already been made, or that ‘Scotland should be an independent country’ represents popular opinion and that the referendum is simply about rubber-stamping that decision.”

Others responded that it implied independence was “inevitable”. The commission also rejected asking voters whether they “want” an independent Scotland because people associated this wording with “an emotional rather than a rational response.”

Almost all voters were found to understand that the term “independent country” meant Scotland being separate from the UK or “managing on its own”.

Some felt the word “independent” was loaded because it was associated with images of “freedom” and the movie Braveheart, but most said it should be included as it is widely recognised and understood.

However, the research also found that a lot of voters have many unanswered questions about independence on issues such as the monarchy, currency, defence, immigration and citizenship.

They also wanted to know what would happen after the autumn 2014 vote. Although the commission said the terms of separation could not be decided beforehand, it said both sides should provide “clarity” on the process that would be followed.

It recommended UK and Scottish ministers to agree a “joint position” on this for either outcome “so that people have that information before the vote”.

The commission also proposed a compromise over campaign spending, with the SNP wanting each campaign to be limited to only £750,000 in the four-month ‘regulated period’ before the vote.

Better Together wanted double this sum, arguing this was not enough to educate voters about the choice they face.

Although the commission backed each lead campaign receiving £1.5 million, it staggered the amount each political party can spend based on their vote in the 2011 Holyrood election.

This formula results in parties on either side of the independence debate being able to spend almost the same amount.

The SNP will be able to spend £1.34 million and the pro-independence Greens £150,000. On the pro-Union side, Labour will get £834,000 to spent in the four months, the Tories £396,000 and the Liberal Democrats £201,000.

Other registered campaigners will be able to spend £150,000 each. Johann Lamont, the Scottish Labour leader, indicated her party did not get the spending power it wanted.

But she added: “We believe that in the interests of clarity and certainty all parties should agree to these proposals.”

Ruth Davidson, her Tory counterpart, added: “Now we can get on with showing how the nations of the United Kingdom are better off together.”

Willie Rennie, the Scottish Liberal Democrat leader, said: “I will accept their word. Setting out the considerable process of breaking up a country would help voters understand the seriousness of the decision.”

Blair Jenkins, chief executive of the Yes Scotland campaign for separation, described the report as an “excellent step forward”.